AntiNerd:Far too effectual and intelligent. No wonder he lost his Senate seat.

Agreed. The mouthbreathers of Wisconsin liked Ron Johnson not having a plan or stance on anything. Plus he hated 0bama. Strangely people in WI hate government in their lives and the government snooping on them. So lets vote out the only Senator who willingly takes on this issue.

Subby here. The only issue I can see with Feingold running for and winning the Presidency is that he's probably not enough of an asshole to actually win the election. He's not really willing to do all the dirty things you need to do to do so. This is arguably why he lost re-election to the Senate as well. It would certainly be an interesting campaign, though.

It's amazing how mainstream "journalists" can make the Tutsi seem like the bad guys in all of this. The War Nerd weighed in six years ago: "If you ever want to find a real hero, here's one way to recognize him: the TV news will be making him into a monster 24/7. Today's monster hero is the Tutsi general Laurent Nkunda, the leader of the "rebel" forces that are supposedly "closing in" on Goma in Eastern Congo."

I can't say I blame you, but you don't click CNN links or anyone else who does lowest common denominator "narrative" tripe, right? Or is this some hypocritical thing?

I can't recall the last time I clicked a CNN link, but their bullshiat is the result of incompetence, not malice.

Politico is a Republican operation, owned by a Bush fundraiser, operated by a Bush advisor, and edited by the lunatic son of a John Bircher. They exist to muddy the waters of politics and draw people's attention away from real policy debates.

The recently departed Joe McGinniss started this whole genre of "inside baseball" political coverage back in 1968. He detailed how the Nixon campaign was focused more on messaging and managing public perceptions than it was on discussing real policy. For example, many Americans came to believe that Nixon had a secret plan to win the Vietnam War.

Politico now uses McGinniss's approach to political reporting to do the very thing McGinniss was trying to expose: the peddling of bullshiat to warp people's views of reality. It might be funny if it weren't so depressing.

Page 5 is where any rational person should start gnashing their teeth in rage and frustration. First Feingold says that it's hard to get the Congo government to stop being so corrupt, even though he JUST removed the only real force giving teeth to demands that the Congo government to stop being so corrupt!

Then the article says "Although the M23's defeat has brought a measure of reprieve to the women of eastern Congo, some of the remaining militias are even worse." M23 (and its predecessors) WERE FIGHTING AGAINST THOSE ONES, YOU farkING KNOBS! And the accusations in this article are utterly unsubstantiated- and probably play to racism, since, of course, they're African jungle-people and therefore rape is all they know, right?

"Facing no impending crackdown, the FDLR was gaining strength, Feingold learned." GEE NO KIDDING? YOU GET RID OF AN ARMY FIGHTING AGAINST SOMETHING, AND IT GETS STRONGER?? WELL THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL! Ohhh goddd and then the next few paragraphs are just oozing with white savior bullshiat. fark this article, fark Feingold, fark all of you lining up to suck his dick, fark white people in general.

I can't say I blame you, but you don't click CNN links or anyone else who does lowest common denominator "narrative" tripe, right? Or is this some hypocritical thing?

I can't recall the last time I clicked a CNN link, but their bullshiat is the result of incompetence, not malice.

Politico is a Republican operation, owned by a Bush fundraiser, operated by a Bush advisor, and edited by the lunatic son of a John Bircher. They exist to muddy the waters of politics and draw people's attention away from real policy debates.

The recently departed Joe McGinniss started this whole genre of "inside baseball" political coverage back in 1968. He detailed how the Nixon campaign was focused more on messaging and managing public perceptions than it was on discussing real policy. For example, many Americans came to believe that Nixon had a secret plan to win the Vietnam War.

Politico now uses McGinniss's approach to political reporting to do the very thing McGinniss was trying to expose: the peddling of bullshiat to warp people's views of reality. It might be funny if it weren't so depressing.

Oh, so it's neither. I understood that politico sucked, but I guess I failed at grasping the why.

RanDomino:Page 5 is where any rational person should start gnashing their teeth in rage and frustration. First Feingold says that it's hard to get the Congo government to stop being so corrupt, even though he JUST removed the only real force giving teeth to demands that the Congo government to stop being so corrupt!

Then the article says "Although the M23's defeat has brought a measure of reprieve to the women of eastern Congo, some of the remaining militias are even worse." M23 (and its predecessors) WERE FIGHTING AGAINST THOSE ONES, YOU farkING KNOBS! And the accusations in this article are utterly unsubstantiated- and probably play to racism, since, of course, they're African jungle-people and therefore rape is all they know, right?

"Facing no impending crackdown, the FDLR was gaining strength, Feingold learned." GEE NO KIDDING? YOU GET RID OF AN ARMY FIGHTING AGAINST SOMETHING, AND IT GETS STRONGER?? WELL THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL! Ohhh goddd and then the next few paragraphs are just oozing with white savior bullshiat. fark this article, fark Feingold, fark all of you lining up to suck his dick, fark white people in general.

RanDomino:Page 5 is where any rational person should start gnashing their teeth in rage and frustration. First Feingold says that it's hard to get the Congo government to stop being so corrupt, even though he JUST removed the only real force giving teeth to demands that the Congo government to stop being so corrupt!

Then the article says "Although the M23's defeat has brought a measure of reprieve to the women of eastern Congo, some of the remaining militias are even worse." M23 (and its predecessors) WERE FIGHTING AGAINST THOSE ONES, YOU farkING KNOBS! And the accusations in this article are utterly unsubstantiated- and probably play to racism, since, of course, they're African jungle-people and therefore rape is all they know, right?

"Facing no impending crackdown, the FDLR was gaining strength, Feingold learned." GEE NO KIDDING? YOU GET RID OF AN ARMY FIGHTING AGAINST SOMETHING, AND IT GETS STRONGER?? WELL THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL! Ohhh goddd and then the next few paragraphs are just oozing with white savior bullshiat. fark this article, fark Feingold, fark all of you lining up to suck his dick, fark white people in general.

RanDomino:Page 5 is where any rational person should start gnashing their teeth in rage and frustration. First Feingold says that it's hard to get the Congo government to stop being so corrupt, even though he JUST removed the only real force giving teeth to demands that the Congo government to stop being so corrupt!

Then the article says "Although the M23's defeat has brought a measure of reprieve to the women of eastern Congo, some of the remaining militias are even worse." M23 (and its predecessors) WERE FIGHTING AGAINST THOSE ONES, YOU farkING KNOBS! And the accusations in this article are utterly unsubstantiated- and probably play to racism, since, of course, they're African jungle-people and therefore rape is all they know, right?

"Facing no impending crackdown, the FDLR was gaining strength, Feingold learned." GEE NO KIDDING? YOU GET RID OF AN ARMY FIGHTING AGAINST SOMETHING, AND IT GETS STRONGER?? WELL THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL! Ohhh goddd and then the next few paragraphs are just oozing with white savior bullshiat. fark this article, fark Feingold, fark all of you lining up to suck his dick, fark white people in general.

Question since I am not as informed as I should be when it comes to African politics. Why haven't the the Western powers forced the DRC to split-up? The country seems unwilling and unable to govern. I'm sure that a lot of Congolese will be upset, but I'm not sure if they should even have a voice in the matter considering their collective incompetence and seeming indifference towards actually becoming a better state.

justinguarini4ever:Question since I am not as informed as I should be when it comes to African politics. Why haven't the the Western powers forced the DRC to split-up? The country seems unwilling and unable to govern. I'm sure that a lot of Congolese will be upset, but I'm not sure if they should even have a voice in the matter considering their collective incompetence and seeming indifference towards actually becoming a better state.

Because western powers interfering with African Sovereignty has one of the lowest batting averages in history for causing justice.

RanDomino:Page 5 is where any rational person should start gnashing their teeth in rage and frustration. First Feingold says that it's hard to get the Congo government to stop being so corrupt, even though he JUST removed the only real force giving teeth to demands that the Congo government to stop being so corrupt!

Then the article says "Although the M23's defeat has brought a measure of reprieve to the women of eastern Congo, some of the remaining militias are even worse." M23 (and its predecessors) WERE FIGHTING AGAINST THOSE ONES, YOU farkING KNOBS! And the accusations in this article are utterly unsubstantiated- and probably play to racism, since, of course, they're African jungle-people and therefore rape is all they know, right?

"Facing no impending crackdown, the FDLR was gaining strength, Feingold learned." GEE NO KIDDING? YOU GET RID OF AN ARMY FIGHTING AGAINST SOMETHING, AND IT GETS STRONGER?? WELL THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL! Ohhh goddd and then the next few paragraphs are just oozing with white savior bullshiat. fark this article, fark Feingold, fark all of you lining up to suck his dick, fark white people in general.

There are no good guys to side with. They are all wicked evil punks. The progress that was just made is unimaginable. This actually creates a neutrality, something unknown in the DRC. Before this it was just a choice between different genocides. I do like the idea of division. Congo is a big place. If that solution comes from within the West should probably let it happen.

eagles95:AntiNerd: Far too effectual and intelligent. No wonder he lost his Senate seat.

Agreed. The mouthbreathers of Wisconsin liked Ron Johnson not having a plan or stance on anything. Plus he hated 0bama. Strangely people in WI hate government in their lives and the government snooping on them. So lets vote out the only Senator who willingly takes on this issue.

He had his senate seat for 12 years. its the mouthbreathers of the tea party plus the lazy dems who cant be arsed to vote in a non-presidential election that elected that, as i stated earlier, fart in a sock. Thankfully 2016 will likelu see the end of him, if we can nominate someone like Ron Kind or the like to the seat.if it is another one of these piss poor campaigners then we may be stuck with him.

justinguarini4everQuestion since I am not as informed as I should be when it comes to African politics. Why haven't the the Western powers forced the DRC to split-up?

That I don't know specifically. In general they're opposed to splitting up countries, but on the other hand South Sudan is now a Western-backed country. I'm sure the answer boils down to which way is easiest to bribe corrupt dictators, bureaucrats, and warlords into letting Western countries get those sweet sweet natural resources (in the Great Lakes region, rare earth elements particularly, iirc) for as cheap as possible.

ikanreedBecause western powers interfering with African Sovereignty has one of the lowest batting averages in history for causing justice.

Why would causing justice have anything to do with it?

onzmadilazy dems who cant be arsed to vote in a non-presidential election

What is it that would make Democratic-leaning voters lazy but not Republican-leaning ones? Something genetic maybe? Mischievous goblins going to the houses of Democratic-leaning voters and sprinkling them with sleeping powder? These theories make just as much sense as your assertion that certain voters are simply "lazy".

RanDomino:What is it that would make Democratic-leaning voters lazy but not Republican-leaning ones? Something genetic maybe? Mischievous goblins going to the houses of Democratic-leaning voters and sprinkling them with sleeping powder? These theories make just as much sense as your assertion that certain voters are simply "lazy".

It's not just a theory. There is a pretty clear difference in the effect of an off year election on turnout between the two parties. Turnout goes down for both, but less so for Republicans. Were I to guess, I would say it has to do with the fact that Democratic voters skew younger and tend to be less politically involved.

"Lazy" might not be the right word. Perhaps "'apathetic" or "disengaged" would be better. Regardless, the effect is that Republicans do better in the off years. For now, at least.

thurstonxhowell "Lazy" might not be the right word. Perhaps "'apathetic" or "disengaged" would be better. Regardless, the effect is that Republicans do better in the off years. For now, at least.

I love this theory because it shuts off all discussion about how to solve the problem. "These people are just too lazy. It's just how they are. Can't do anything about it".

Or maybe the Democrats focus on flashy national campaigns while the Republicans have been building an actual base for decades.

Nah, can't be that. That implies that there's actual work that could be done. No, it's probably something that we can't solve, because that way we can just sit on the Internet and complain while patting ourselves on the back for being right. While, back in reality, losing.

RanDomino:thurstonxhowell"Lazy" might not be the right word. Perhaps "'apathetic" or "disengaged" would be better. Regardless, the effect is that Republicans do better in the off years. For now, at least.

I love this theory because it shuts off all discussion about how to solve the problem. "These people are just too lazy. It's just how they are. Can't do anything about it".

Or maybe the Democrats focus on flashy national campaigns while the Republicans have been building an actual base for decades.

Nah, can't be that. That implies that there's actual work that could be done. No, it's probably something that we can't solve, because that way we can just sit on the Internet and complain while patting ourselves on the back for being right. While, back in reality, losing.

So, to you, step 1 to solving a problem is solving it, huh? You just skip over acknowledging the existence of a problem?

Read the last 4 words of my post and tell me again how I think this is unsolvable.